Stop arguing about who pays for care and figure out why it costs so much
Part of the problem with Britain's care system is that we are paying crisis prices for problems that cost much less to prevent.
Britain's care system is plagued by exorbitant costs, writes Dr Ben Maruthappu, who argues that many issues could be prevented rather than paid for. At a care home in Golders Green, the Prime Minister unveiled proposals to reform social care, but debates focused on taxes and funding rather than the underlying reasons behind the high costs.
The issue lies in the delivery model, which is broken and has been for 30 years. Surgery, for instance, became more affordable when patients were treated as day cases rather than over-long hospital stays. Dr Maruthappu advocates a shift towards preventing problems rather than addressing them after they occur. A case study from Hammersmith & Fulham shows that free home care can be effective.
The council's £19m investment, funded through efficiency measures, has resulted in 1,500 people avoiding care homes each year, thanks to daily home care visits and AI tools that catch health issues early. AI-enabled care robots are now in use across 14 local authorities, preventing an estimated 296 hospital admissions annually and saving £2m daily.
While some may argue that councils with weaker tax bases cannot replicate Hammersmith's model, the cost of free home care is based on the assumption of maintaining the current delivery model, which is inefficient. Technology can help alleviate the administrative burden on care workers, allowing them to focus on patient care. Dr Maruthappu's point is that after 30 years of arguing about who should pay, it's time to focus on reforming the delivery of social care to make it affordable and preventative.
Written by urgent.news from City AM's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
